About your Search

20130801
20130831
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
, i think what people care about in pakistan is america is blowing people up from the sky. they're not showing their faces. they see this cowardly and it alienates the population. understand there's a real debate to be had about the blowback of drone strikes. but our rhetoric has nothing to do with it. >> you know, jonathan, elections are imprecise. you choose one party or the other, one general approach or the other. the general approach of the bush administration george w was a freedom agenda. certainly the idea of the road to jerusalem is through baghdad. all this sort of neo con theorizing that if we go over there and go into iraq, somehow the front lines in the middle east will be loosen up, there will be some democratizing and it will somehow lead to a peace treat things will be better in the middle east. that means war generally. it means war. twice into iraq, once in afghanistan. obama came in saying i'm sort of a '60s guy. i don't really think big war is the answer to all big problems. i think a more surgical approach, let's get the bad guys and narrow it to that. let's
in america." the pendulum is swinging in the republican party now. as the party moves hard right, will they really try another establishment time like romney or dole or mccain or christie or jeb bush? or will the party go for one of its tea party heroes like rand paul? here with me now is the author of the great book "collision 2016." dan, let's talk about what you call the subterranean campaign of 2012 and what it offers us in the future. >> we think of the campaign as the campaign we all cover all the time. everything we talk about, every utterance, every gaffe, every debate, every movement. and that's part of politics and in many ways the interesting and enjoyable part of politics, but it's not necessarily the decisive part of politics. there are important and powerful underlying forces that effect every campaign. in 2012, one was the economy. would it be just good enough to allow president obama to win re-election or bad enough to deny re-election. another was voter anger. which direction would it go? a third was the deep red/blue divide and how that shaped attitudes beyond w
country, i love getting the usa today or both. i love reading:00 america from europe. and every day you see me here at this desk. i've spent a good part of the morning loving the "new york times" and the "washington post" and politico, the political trade paper. and sometimes "the wall street journal" as well. i love the feel of the broad sheet, the excitement of a tab, the turning of the pages, the checking of the sports section, and the scores. the celebrity news, just enough that is, and the opinions on the op-ed page. i want to know what people like me and also not like me are thinking. newspapers are great for one great reason. they throw it at you. you don't go looking for a piece on pakistan, but there it is, staring at you when you go to what you are looking for. newspapers not only tell you what is new and what you know about, but also what is new on what you should know about. they alert you, tickle you, taunt you, until you have caught up and know what the story is. the sale of "the washington post" is a tricky matter for the single region that it is an original source of kno
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)